Deploy a private Github repository with whiskey_disk(object.io)
object.io
Deploy a private Github repository with whiskey_disk
http://object.io/site/2011/whiskey_disk-private-github/
5 comments
Sorry if I've not understood correctly, but what is the benefit of this over, say, Capistrano? I'm a little confused.
Good question! The main benefit is you deploy directly from your git-server to your production server, instead of uploading from your own computer. This means a lot faster deploys, especially when your deployments are large or your internet connection is really poor (being able to make deployments quickly while on a 3G connection is awesome). whiskey_disk uses one ssh connection to your server for all work (so less time for spawning ssh connections), and the heavy traffic is not to/from your local machine.
Other benefits of the tool include putting all config files into version control, and a lot less less magic in your deployments.
Other benefits of the tool include putting all config files into version control, and a lot less less magic in your deployments.
Capistrano does pulls directly from the Git repo by default. It will use a single SSH connection between client and host if you have the SSH control master socket enabled.
I've gotten into the habit of just having git installed on my web server, and pulling directly from there. Is there some reason why whiskey_disk is better?
Sounds like a simple solution which gets the job done. Using whiskey_disk would reduce your typing by a bit (repeatability is nice for things done all the time), but if you don't have any post-commit tasks you have to run on each deploy, stick with what you have.
Where you'd really see benefit would be when you have multiple config files (with database credentials and addresses, for instance) that vary per server and environment involved. In addition, if you need to run post-deploy actions such as building assets, or run database migrations, a tool would help you.
However, until you feel the pain of your current setup, no need to change what works :)
Where you'd really see benefit would be when you have multiple config files (with database credentials and addresses, for instance) that vary per server and environment involved. In addition, if you need to run post-deploy actions such as building assets, or run database migrations, a tool would help you.
However, until you feel the pain of your current setup, no need to change what works :)
I've been looking at similar solutions. I've tried using fluxflex.com, but it only seems to work for public projects. The main purpose of my site is not to have full-scale operations: just a place online to test it.
Anyone know of similar solutions?
Anyone know of similar solutions?
I'm not a fan of fluxflex and I've discontinued using them. Too much middle-man for my liking. Last Friday I worked through http://cuppster.com/2011/05/12/diy-node-js-server-on-amazon-... , better than http://blog.carbonfive.com/2011/09/01/deploying-node-js-on-a..., in the afternoon and save for a couple of idiot glitches on my part, it works fine. EC2 is a real bitch, for me at least, so I'll stick with Linode for now. With a little elbow grease you'll be able to get it to work with Github as well, but I'm looking forward to using whiskey_disk today.
Thanks! I will check these out.
Since this came up, my take on deploying from Github looks like this: https://github.com/samsonjs/ThePusher ... deploy by pushing.
+1 for the name. LOL!
[deleted]